Day 56 - deemed acceptance of formal representations for a parking PCN.

 

Extract of 2022 Appeals Regulations

The above Regulations are only about parking (not moving traffic e.g. yellow boxes or bus lanes) and applies to 'formal' representations which are those made in response to

- a Notice to Owner

- a postal drive away or physical prevention PCN sent by post

- after recovering your car from the pound to which it was removed.

Mr Mustard has a control sheet for every PCN he fights (an old school sheet of paper) onto which the outline facts of the case are noted. Thus he has the dates of the formal representations and the Notice of Rejection adjacent to each other and his experienced eye picks up cases which are near to or above 56 days. He had such a case in Westminster in May 24 and so no matter how bad the parking might have been (the elderly driver had paid for the wrong vehicle so not a heinous crime) Westminster had timed themselves out of the game. They can't complain, they get 56 days and a motorist never gets more than 28. Here are the grounds of Appeal to the tribunal.

Nine days after starting the Appeal the City of Westminster decided not to fight the Appeal but to cancel the PCN. That was sensible.

Mr Mustard wasn't finished. He thought he couldn't be the one in a million for whom the process had gone wrong and so he asked for some data under the Freedom of Information legislation.

Westminster replied fully and furnished Mr Mustard with a spreadsheet containing 407,284 entries (they included both under and over 54 days). Having distilled it down to late entries Mr Mustard sent a follow up to the parking department which told them, in measured terms, that they had done wrong.

Parking management at Westminster are always polite to Mr Mustard (some council parking managers aren't keen on Mr Mustard because he picks up their errors and causes them extra work but a department which enforces the law must follow the law) and he had to give them a gentle nudge. Shortly thereafter he received a full response.

Mr Mustard decided to double-check the position regarding 'bailiff' charges as although he expected they were being refunded he does like clarity. His question was really to see who picks up the bill for refunding the bailiff charges and it seems it is the bailiff. Don't cry for them, the companies make £millions (the individual bailiffs a pretty penny if they work hard).

There was a swift response to the follow-up:

Good news for the 145 motorists affected. If you are one of them please donate some of your refund to the North London Hospice as a thank you for Mr Mustard's unknown help.

This just leaves the unasked question as to why there isn't a software rule in place which automatically cancels PCNs in accordance with the law once a formal representation reaches the age of 55 days as no Notice of Rejection can then be served in time. PCN software is set up to automate the process as far as possible to the benefit of the enforcement authority. It should also contain parameters which ensure that authorities, endowed with huge power, do not abuse it and break the law.

Mr Mustard expects that quite a few parking managers read the blog. He will be checking all authorities in London in the year to March 2025 to make sure they have not erred like Westminster did. He will expect them to take the same corrective action mirroring the professional approach taken by Westminster.

The end.